Banks React to OPEC Meeting, See Prices Lower for Longer

Global oil prices fell in response to last week’s OPEC meeting that apparently ended in acrimony as members did not agree on an output cut and failed to set a new production target. Nymex West Texas Intermediate (WTI) dropped below $40 per barrel and ICE Brent dropped to $42.68. Some analysts see a possibility the market could fall further, with non-OPEC supply and emerging market demand growth just as critical as OPEC output in shaping fundamental balances in the months to come.

The group scrapped its previous output ceiling of 30 million barrels per day without coming up with a new target.

The group scrapped its previous output ceiling of 30 million barrels per day without coming up with a new target. But the main news out of Vienna was that the status quo will remain: The Saudi-led “free market” strategy continues, meaning prices are poised to remain lower for longer. OPEC is currently producing around 31.5 to 32 mbd. In November 2014, the group, led by the Kingdom, opted to fight for market share instead of cutting back output to lift prices. Saudi Arabia did not want to lose market share and in turn subsidize high-cost non-OPEC production, such as U.S. shale.

While the group is already pumping at high levels, there will be more oil next year, with Iran set to increase its export volumes once sanctions are lifted. Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh was quoted on his arrival to Vienna as promising a 500k barrel per day increase in Iran’s exports in early 2016, rising to 1 mbd by end of year. This return is one of the main reasons for uncertainty in 2016, with OPEC Secretary-General Abdallah Salem El Badri saying that the group will have a clearer picture on what the output ceiling should be at the next meeting in June.

Dysfunction in the cartel

But it’s not only the current strategy that portends low oil prices for the foreseeable future. The group’s apparent dysfunction, along with Iran’s return to the market in 2016, is another ominous sign. The fact that the group could not agree on a revised production target reflects that the cartel’s members are at odds and are unlikely to come to a consensus anytime soon to successfully manage the market.

“In our view, the lack of guidance on a production quota underlines the discord among members. Past communiques have at least included statements to adhere, strictly adhere, or maintain output in line with the production target,” said Barclays analysts in a note on Friday. “For OPEC, managing the impossible trinity of achieving higher market share, higher prices and higher demand through a nominal target which members continue to breach continues to be difficult.”

They added: “OPEC matters when other supply is inelastic, but shale can be and already is reactive to prices, making the cartel less relevant as a balancing mechanism for prices.”

“For OPEC, managing the impossible trinity of achieving higher market share, higher prices and higher demand through a nominal target which members continue to breach continues to be difficult.”

This morning, Citi Futures expressed similar sentiments, saying, “The oil market is rendering a clear bearish verdict on the outcome of Friday’s OPEC meeting with a drop of more than 4.0 percent that has already taken the Brent market to a fresh six-year low. There are those still inclined to spin OPEC’s lack of discipline as an intentional plan designed to capture market share and lead to a stronger market over the intermediate to longer term, but it may be the Iranian oil minister’s summation of the policy as “everyone does whatever they want” that is resonating with traders. The ripple effects are including a weaker Russian ruble, a weaker Canadian dollar, and a stronger US dollar that feeds back as another reason to sell crude oil.”

While the view that OPEC is facing strong signs of internal stress is widely shared, as Saudi Arabia’s Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi emphasized many times during the meeting, “We have said on more than one occasion we are willing to cooperate with anyone who genuinely wants to balance the market,” including non-OPEC members such as Russia, leaving the door open for future collusion.

Market to balance in 2H 2016?

Most analysts expect the global oil market to start balancing during the second half of next year, as non-OPEC supply falls and demand growth is stimulated from low prices. But until then, there will be continued pain among producers inside and outside the group.

“There was no decision on a new target ceiling, with the decision on how to accommodate higher Iranian production left to the next meeting in June,” said Goldman Sachs analysts in a report. “Comments further stressed the need for the oil market to rebalance on its own (‘wait and watch’) and the organization made no comment on adhering to country level quotas.”

Both Barclays and Goldman forecast the global oil market to rebalance in the fourth quarter of next year, which would be about two years after OPEC’s historic decision. The extended period of low prices has hurt all producers, with Venezuela getting hit the hardest.

Despite seeing the market rebalance late next year, Goldman notes that prices could retreat to the $20 area. “There are high risks that this may prove too slow an adjustment as inventories continue to accumulate and storage utilization nears high levels in the face of a mild winter, slowing emerging market growth and a potential lift of international Iranian sanctions,” the analysts write. “The rising probability that markets may need to adjust through ‘operational stress,’ when surpluses breach capacity, leaves risks to our forecast as skewed to the downside in coming months, with cash costs near $20/bbl.”

OPEC is banking on non-OPEC supply contracting next year and global demand rising by a robust 1.3 mbd. But if the situations on the supply and demand side do not play out accordingly, the meeting in June will be even more contentious.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to our newsletter today!

The Fuse is an energy news and analysis site supported by Securing America’s Future Energy. The views expressed here are those of individual contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the organization.

Issues in Focus

Safety Standards for Crude-By-Rail Shipments

A series of accidents in North America in recent years have raised concerns regarding rail shipments of crude oil. Fatal accidents in Lynchburg, Virginia, Lac-Megantic, Quebec, Fayette County, West Virginia, and (most recently) Culbertson, Montana have prompted public outcry and regulatory scrutiny.

2014 saw an all-time record of 144 oil train incidents in the U.S.—up from just one in 2009—causing a total of more than $7 million in damage.

The spate of crude-by-rail accidents has emerged from the confluence of three factors. First is the massive increase in oil movements by rail, which has increased more than three-fold since 2010. Second is the inadequate safety features of DOT-111 cars, particularly those constructed prior to 2011, which account for roughly 70 percent of tank cars on U.S. railroads. Third is the high volatility of oil produced from the Bakken and other shale formations, which makes this crude more prone towards combustion.

Of these three, rail car safety standards is the factor over which regulators can exert the most control. After months of regulatory review, on May 1, 2015, the White House and the Department of Transportation unveiled the new safety standards. The announcement also coincided with new tank car standards in Canada—a critical move, since many crude by rail shipments cross the U.S.-Canadian border. In the words DOT, the new rule:

Since the rule was announced, Republicans in Congress sought to roll back the provision calling for an advanced breaking system, following concerns from the rail industry that such an upgrade would be unnecessary and could cost billions of dollars. The advanced braking systems are required to be in place by 2021.

Democrats in Congress have argued that the new rules are insufficient to mitigate the danger. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) both issued statements arguing that the rules were insufficient and the timelines for safety improvements were too long.

The current industry standard car, the CPC-1232, came into usage in October 2011. These cars have half inch thick shells (marginally thicker than the DOT-111 7/16 inch shells) and advanced valves that are more resilient in the event of an accident. However, these newer cars were involved in the derailments and explosions in Virginia and West Virginia within the past year, raising questions about the validity of replacing only the DOT-111s manufactured before 2011.

Before the rule was finalized, early reports indicated that the rule submitted to the White House by the Department of Transportation has proposed a two-stage phase-out of the current fleet of railcars, focusing first on the pre-2011 cars, then the current standard CPC-1232 cars. In the final rule, DOT mandated a more aggressive timeline for retrofitting the CPC-1232 cars, imposing a deadline of April 1, 2020 for non-jacketed cars.

Oops!

We weren't able to sign you up for our newsletter.Please check your email address and try again.

DataSpotlight

The recent oil production boom in the United States, while astounding, has created a misleading narrative that the United States is no longer dependent on oil imports. Reports of surging domestic production, calls for relaxation of the crude oil export ban, labels of “Saudi America,” and the recent collapse in oil prices have created a perception that the United States has more oil than it knows what to do with.

This view is misguided. While some forecasts project that the United States could become a self-sufficient oil producer within the next decade, this remains a distant prospect. According to the April 2015 Short Term Energy Outlook, total U.S. crude oil production averaged an estimated 9.3 million barrels per day in March, while total oil demand in the country is over 19 million barrels per day.

This graphic helps illustrate the regional variations in crude oil supply and demand. North America, Europe, and Asia all run significant production deficits, with the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and Former Soviet Union are global engines of crude oil supply.